From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BBC5C79F82 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2026 02:51:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=C3df1ugh6rUzruXPX+OJp8A2wl50vXoeEbMwgMt7JGQ=; b=48Gvgs0ziGzdNvlspja/c+kX00 YXxln6nKLKkRzAYxDKJPOai6CebZ9vMbYp1p1khGLNloUSvo2dwwLpMA4FNU6ttKmTEtlhRvQbFfO iyBjilmVOmAZrYHrDE0wcK0hl5WwFmk37Y4bYhKhNmPNtjRdOIotJPgCsPjMfu4IGwJla1BpuF7wt ph306T7Xmq5Td/B1IBCErYqek1dej5eNmlSnd3jv93gEiUlnGuk0uT4RdsTe6ioXr7t4eIWMJz7dQ DbARi2E2uI+7gW9Z8Cl/WVsCsOQyrryWRrEj1aUiXt4M18f6fg5wxWKjJN/wD4yOHCLLVg0+YRNz6 69RG5KeQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x2gV5-00000003cD4-25cX; Sat, 05 Sep 2026 02:51:27 +0000 Received: from galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x2gV2-00000003cCg-2RZR; Sat, 05 Sep 2026 02:51:26 +0000 From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1788576680; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=C3df1ugh6rUzruXPX+OJp8A2wl50vXoeEbMwgMt7JGQ=; b=f+IfZYh02MvNdVrnFsEjZ4G++kBTWkOlKuUw+3PKhov/C0rvmt5d9hVpCYJeWEkZQCnoAf IsBOB9SJ/ukPY/NofPwrkYw4/z4/oXTPBhLpYDvle2leiszhwQKjoObZ/al6KWOFkgr5ZG msUKYm/quktS/uhLadceUv1RSYYg2tLiW/GzUBhTVp0f3D4TLdl4OX4CfSoo6FS/M/01AB Q4KfMrCdPHnia7NSvCqRo7ij0Q0+L+fFwaMn43ahpuAdX08lHZPdi6SclPCDbjU08RL7jM 5sRU0wxlnItYPGPuGdk1dpMqhWM0jfej/m32kMv1Gh6Jr5b8o/ENLOEOS9NoHA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1788576680; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=C3df1ugh6rUzruXPX+OJp8A2wl50vXoeEbMwgMt7JGQ=; b=ifFd0LWf4Jb0hg6moZmbTBt5hEpYB5RTHdy3YrlSBNWGwFhsR4JqdoTOpD87JnjOj19VlF UniHL//75eSm+VAg== To: Thomas Gleixner , LKML Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Radu Rendec , Marc Zyngier , Anup Patel , Paul Walmsley Subject: Re: Interrupt chip driver maintainence In-Reply-To: <871pb9841j.ffs@fw13> References: <871pb9841j.ffs@fw13> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2026 04:51:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87ld9g9zrt.fsf@yellow.woof> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260904_195124_766620_B344665E X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 8.50 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Thomas Gleixner writes: > I'm wading through my inbox full of patches for interrupt chip drivers > and I'm thoroughly annoyed. The way how this works today is not > sustainable. > > Patches end up in my and Radu's inbox and all we can do is go through > them mostly on a formal basis, but it's out of our scope to look at the > correctness vs. a particular hardware. In the past I just picked up > patches when I had the gut feeling they are remotely correct, but I'm > tired of this. I have hardware to test the SiFive PLIC. I also spent quite some time staring at the specification attempting to cleanse the mess we have for plic_irq_eoi() (which sadly yielded nothing). I can help looking at patches. Would that help moving things forward? Nam